quote:Originally posted by GrumpySteen: Please stop arguing and making inflammatory statements in this topic.

For once, I would like us to set aside our tendancy to be assholes towards one another and simply celebrate what is probably the most historic election result any of us will see in our lives.

If you can't do that, please start your own topic to bitch and whine.

Thank you Steen for breaking ranks and calling out Dragon for his inflammatory remarks to Rhonwyyn.

If you were directing those remarks at me, perhaps you should reread the posts, and see that *I*, while not entirely innocent of being argumentative, certainly hold no monopoly on that tendency.
Posts: 70 | From: Never you mind | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged

posted November 06, 2008 08:34
Liz, I won't be responding to derailing the pro-life argument into a war discussion.

When people say "It goes without saying" that is a red flag that says to me: "Warning, opinions spewing without facts ahead"

quote:Originally posted by dragonman97: (It also goes without saying that John McCain was pro-choice until he wanted to be elected into office by conservative voters....lalalalalalala....)

How about I send you to the Pro-Choice website to see how they view McCain

"Sen. John McCain served in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1983 to 1986 and in the U.S. Senate from 1987 to present. During his four years in the House, then-Rep. McCain cast 11 votes on abortion and other reproductive-rights issues. Ten of these votes were anti-choice. In the Senate, Sen. McCain has cast 119 votes on abortion and other reproductive-rights issues, 115 of which were anti-choice.

In addition to his solidly anti-choice record, Sen. McCain has never cosponsored or supported legislation that would prevent unintended pregnancy or reduce the need for abortion"

That is from his opponents. Now you run off and find something to contradict it. I am sure in this world of twitter and blogs and everyone with a keyboard a reporter, you can find someone with a quote to support almost any view.

With all of this said, I did congratulate Obama on his win, and his campaign. I support many of the things he is promising to do. My opinion has always been that you don't get to be president without owing too many people too many favors. I hope he can prove me wrong. But I simply cannot vote for a candidate that does not support the basic human rights of everyone, born or unborn.

I think there are some serious disconnect between Social Conservatives and classic Conservatives. I have often wondered about this.

My rejection of the Republican Party was their shift to social conservationism. I understand the want for people to be moral, or their wish for the country to have a true moral compass. This is honestly a good thing. What has often bothered me and still does is how people consider that religion should be inserted into politics.

Here is my main question. Who's religion do you want?

Sorry Catholics, the Baptists think you are crazy. Sorry Baptists, the Catholics think you guys are heretics. Who's God does the Republican party represent?

Yes there are things both groups agree upon, but think about it, how much do you also disagree on? And what happens if Jews or the (gasp!!) Muslims become the predominant religious force in the US? Do you really want them pushing their religious ideals on your life?

This is what I really don't get about bringing god into our capitol. Who's God is that person really representing? And you can see what happens when extremist religious factions take a country over. This concerns me a lot more than anything.

My concerns with the Pro-Death comment is this. Pro-choice does not equal to Pro-Death. No matter how you cut it. There may be people that think that babies should be unceremoniously dispatched. I cannot deny that there isn't a nutjob in every faction. But pro-choice does not equate having 5 minute drive-thu placenta removal centers. But instead, from my personal viewpoint, equals free choice in the matter that concerns your life.

I personally detest the idea of abortion. But this doesn't mean I think that it should be illegal. Instead I wish that there was a social structure that offered help for people in a situation where abortion is an option. Not condemnation.

The Socialist slant that I have seen is a case of stupidity in right-wing politics. Anyone that truly understands how the government works, knows we already have some socialistic mechanisms in place. There is seriously no way to deny it. It is just the way it has been. Hell if you really think about it, government road works projects are a form of Socialism. Why does the government do this? It should be everyone's personal responsibility to make their own roads.

The argument that taxes should be lowered for low and middle-class Americans but not raised for upper-class Americans simply cannot work. A government works off of revenue. You can't run a business by giving away fruit to the hungry and charging a penny to the rich. Something has to give. Do I believe in fleecing the rich? Absolutely not! But I do believe that those that have, can take give a bit more than those that don't.

Here is the thing, some things simply cannot work. We are a nation of many. We are a nation of the haves and the have-nots. I don't believe for one second you will be able to legislate morality, I do however believe that people can pay their fair share.

Just look at the media to see what happens when people become super-rich. How many really give to help those below them. Sorry, taxation is relatively low for many large-scale businesses. Look at current cost of living studies and how far our dollar goes. Does it look like employers are passing their savings on to the little guy?

This election is the first one where I have not voted Libertarian. I still believe in many of their ideals. And in many ways it is wishful thinking that a true Libertarian government would be great. But in light of current political, financial and worldwide trends, I cannot sit back and think that the time is now.

NoRealReason, my issue with the Pro-Death line is that it is a standpoint of hate. I do not have issues if you have the pro-life stance. There needs to be people that disagree with the pro-choice stance to balance the scales. It is just the right-wing version of the left wings yell of racist and hate-monger. It is simply not the whole truth. It is glorified overbearing catchphrases to make the soul shake. This I think is a pitiful thing that anyone would stoop to such a level.

If you had said, I will vote for the pro-life candidate, instead of the one that thinks abortions should be legal, I would have had no issues. I wouldn't have agreed, but I would not have made any comment.

That was where my concerns came to light.

My disagreement with DMan was the racist line. There may be plenty of other things that I am not aware of that caused him to make his comment. They may even be true. I am not aware of it, and if it is not something of common knowledge, it really shouldn't have been drug out into this public forum.

Here is my small article on personal beliefs, I do hope that it clarified my reasoning to everyone.

posted November 06, 2008 08:55
NoRealReason: it's hard to be considered inflammatory when one readily admits the possibility of being wrong. Something you do not do, as far as I can tell. (But the Dragon did.)

The emitter's responsibility is to make sure the signal reach the receptor within the acceptable error margin. If the message is lost or corrupted, then the emission must be adapted to the environmnet the signal travels through. End of "theory of communication 101" course for today.

So nobody is asking you to change your opinions, just to present them in a more acceptable way. Drop the "pro-death", will you?

posted November 06, 2008 11:29
Ah yes. Gut-wrenching decisions are always easy until you're the one making them.

--------------------And it's one, two, three / On the wrong side of the lee / What were you meant for? / What were you meant for?- The DecemberistsPosts: 7670 | From: the lab | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged

posted November 06, 2008 13:53
Shroom,Thank you for one of the most levelheaded and lucid posts I have read on these issues. I do apologize to you and anyone else who were offended by my use of "pro-death", everyone, that is, except mono and lizard.

I think the problem is that I was characterizing Obama himself, the candidate, as pro-death, not those who supported or voted for him. If that did not come through, it was my fault, and again, sorry.

As for you, mono (because I only hear one-channel from you)

quote:Originally posted by Stereo: NoRealReason: it's hard to be considered inflammatory when one readily admits the possibility of being wrong. Something you do not do, as far as I can tell. (But the Dragon did.)

Lizard did put in pithy little comments that may absolve him from libel, but the intent, and the belief, were both clear. The way I read his post, he thinks, for reasons unknown to me, that Rhonwyyn's husband, and indeed, anyone not voting for Obama apparantly, stand a good chance of being racist. Evidently McCain (and Nader, and whoever else) supporters are trying to hide their racism behind other frivolous arguments like basic human life, experience, and economic theories. This is my opinion, based on the way I have interpreted what I have read here. I could be completely wrong. By the way, I sprinkled my previous posts with phrases like 'it appears', 'I believe' and 'my opinon'. Maybe my way of expressing that I leave room in my life for the possibility that I could be wrong didn't come through, but man, I thought that was what those words meant.

PS: It goes without saying that arguing with mono and lizzy is a waste of time, and people observing the argument may not know which of you are the real idiot, so I will refrain from said activity from now on. Posts: 70 | From: Never you mind | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged

posted November 06, 2008 14:34
It probably makes him feel good though.

--------------------And it's one, two, three / On the wrong side of the lee / What were you meant for? / What were you meant for?- The DecemberistsPosts: 7670 | From: the lab | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged

posted November 06, 2008 15:04
Well well...I suppose it goes without saying that I was wrong on McCain and being pro-choice!

I know I've seen things that suggested that McCain's prior views were much more center-leaning and that he was not distinctly pro-life, but I would have to guess that those things that I saw were mistaken. Either that, or the Tubes have been whitewashed.

The closest some cursory searching gets to McCain being moderate is the following:

quote:Schecter quotes an August 1999 speech that McCain delivered to the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco:

"I'd love to see a point where [Roe v. Wade] is irrelevant, and could be repealed because abortion is no longer necessary. But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade, which would then force x number of women to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations."

To paraphrase, McCain is against abortion, but thinks it would be a bad idea to ban it now, as it could be very dangerous to women who seek abortion anyway. Taking a pro-life point of view into account, this is actually a sensible perspective.

I do not care for the idea of abortion, but I think the idea of government dictating religious policy on women's health is considerably worse. This echoes my previous comment of "Pro-Choice is not Pro-Death." Supporting the right to choose does not mean you have to actively recommend abortion, and there's the big grey area of 'where life starts' which is not a discussion for here, but rather that you let the allow the woman the choice to decide how she will take care of herself. If you believe in Christianity, you believe in Free Will, and this requires you to let people make their own decisions, heavy as they may be. I really don't think you're going to find many women who go for an abortion who take it lightly...but the alternative is quite possibly far worse, and at the end of the day, that's their decision to make.

Those are my pinko-commie two cents, so if you'll excuse me, I believe it's time for me to slither away and slurp up coffee.

--------------------There are three things you can be sure of in life: Death, taxes, and reading about fake illnesses online...Posts: 9332 | From: Westchester County, New York | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged

posted November 06, 2008 15:21
Perhaps Norealreason you should find something more concrete than their forum name if you want to criticise the dragon and Stereo. People in glass houses etc etc

Actually you might do better to select other targets, as they are both well respected here as highly intelligent members of long standing.

Even better still, why not stop trying to start a flame war, and actually discuss some of the arguments presented to you in a civil manner. Give some respect and you might get it back. Pro or anti abortion are more accurate labels which do not insult those who hold the opposing view.

I do not share your views on abortion but would be interested to explore how far you take them. I presume you view abortion as murder - correct? Do you think that if abortion is no longer permitted, should anyone discovered to have had an abortion be charge with that that crime? Should they face the death penalty?

quote:Originally posted by NoRealReason: Nowhere near as good as irritating the 3 of you. More of the new vs. the stale on this board.

You know, if only you'd ask nicely I'm sure you'd find that there are people around who would gladly collect your toys from the floor and place them back in your pram. If all this amuses you, then fair enough -- knock yourself out. Just don't expect anyone to treat your comments with any more respect than they would a bad noise.

quote:Originally posted by NoRealReason: As for you, mono (because I only hear one-channel from you)

He he! Like I'm going to feel offended by that! After all, I do apply my own lessons:

I tried, with a PM, to explain why the use of "pro-death" is offensive to designate the pro-choices (and explain my own position along the way - clearly that part was a mistake). You said it again. So yes, I went to mono channel with a simpler, stronger message. Still no ACK from you. So what option do I have left? Telling that calling Obama "pro-death" is calling me, along with everyone who shares his opinion on abortion, just the same? That it is not only disrespectful, but offensive, and the repetition an evident attempt at raising tempers (trolling)? Or will I have to conclude that there is too much noise, and I should wait for better transmission conditions? Or just give up?

Now, please do point me to where I have been disrespectful to Rhon or her husband. Or are you mixing up "message" and "emitter", and think that by attacking her arguments, I attack her? I think she's an intelligent person, and able to do her own research if her opinions are shaken. Don't you?

Hey, I'm a big girl, and I do not feel a lesser person by admitting wrongdoing on my part - when there is one. Rhonwyyn, if by any way you have felt hurt or insulted by anything I have said, I am very sorry. Know that I respect you, even if we have very different views on some touchy subjects. If I tend to defend my opinions heatedly, it is in no way meant to belittle nor insult my opponent. I consider you a friend (the kind I love to argue with, then five minutes later go shopping with), and would love to know that you feel the same toward me. Do you forgive me? And if you show me how exactly I have offended you, I will do my best to avoid it from now on.

Last thing: yes, NRR, I did notice the effort in using those moderate words, and I appreciate it. You sound a lot less aggressive this way. Now, if you could stop those childish attempts at insulting people, who knows, you could turn out to be a nice person to discuss with!

quote:Originally posted by NoRealReason: Nowhere near as good as irritating the 3 of you. More of the new vs. the stale on this board.

If thinking you irritated me makes you feel better about yourself, have a ball. I'll admit to being a little confused as to what you think is so new about yourself... or are you supposed to be the stale one? That would make more sense.

quote:Originally posted by Xanthine: It probably makes him feel good though.

It still won't make his penis any bigger......poor little thing.

Of course not. Nothing's going to do that. All we can do is try to be compassionate. Most men go in for a fancy toy of some kind, but perhaps a big fscking penis-mobile is out of NoRealReason's price range. So he's resorting to cheaper sources of male enhancement, such as trolling.

--------------------And it's one, two, three / On the wrong side of the lee / What were you meant for? / What were you meant for?- The DecemberistsPosts: 7670 | From: the lab | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged

quote:Originally posted by Stereo: I consider you a friend (the kind I love to argue with, then five minutes later go shopping with), and would love to know that you feel the same toward me. Do you forgive me? And if you show me how exactly I have offended you, I will do my best to avoid it from now on.

We get to go shopping?! Yay!!!

Hey, no worries, Stereo. I can't remember what you said, so apparently it didn't offend me.

I was rather annoyed at dman's assertion that Jonathan and I are racist. I couldn't have cared less if the candidates had been spotted with purple polka dots. Granted, I was rather intrigued by Palin and would choose her and her supposed ignorance about affairs of state over Hilary Clinton any day. I can't put it into words, but Hilary just scares me. Maybe it's 'cause she looks and acts like my dad's second ex-wife? Heh. I guess that makes me some sort of -ist for feeling that way.

I was thinking about what Calli said earlier about me being intelligent but bowing out of political conversations. I liken it to the talking about computers. I know the differences between Mac and PC, and I know about of how they both work, and I know many of their pros and cons. However, I can't talk about the issues surrounding those two kinds of computers like many of you can. My knowledge is limited. I've tried to learn more, but I get lost because there's just so *much* to learn and understand. After a while, I start feeling like this:

It's the same way with politics. I can handle it on a basic level, but some issues, I just don't know what to think about them because they're so complicated. That makes me feel like this: So I step back and just watch and listen.

--------------------Change the way you SEE, not the way you LOOK!Posts: 3849 | From: Lancaster, PA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged

posted November 06, 2008 17:27
Anyway as we were saying... the long night of unreason is over, and however bad the situation, or seemingly insurmountable the problems, at least we won't have those movement conservative fruit loops there in Washington to screw it up even more.

Contrary to all that socialist scare talk Obama will govern from the centre, first because that is the stance he has taken right from the start, and secondly because that is the way to secure a second term.

There is a subtext in Rhonnie and NRR's posts that those who voted for Obama, did so because of they were seduced by his rock star charisma and believe he will solve all the worlds problems with a sprinkling of fairy dust. Actually nothing could be further from the truth. He won because America has had enough of the radical right wing political experiment, which has led us to the sorry pass we are in now. I would be interested to know what you in the US think of this analysis of the political forces behind Obama's victory.

quote:Originally posted by Callipygous:Actually you might do better to select other targets, as they are both well respected here as highly intelligent members of long standing.

Give some respect and you might get it back. Pro or anti abortion are more accurate labels which do not insult those who hold the opposing view.

Interesting....I believe that when confronted with reasoned words and opinions, I had responded in kind. Are you also speaking to CpnVic and Xanthine, both of whom resorted to the old stand-by, the penis joke. Not only childish, but vulgar as well, a 2 for 1 deal. They are part of what I refer to as the stale vs the new. Anything they, or anyone else averaging 4299+ posts says, will be viewed with a much softer focus than anything I, or anyone with and average of 55 posts, might say. Heavens forbid I say something ill-tempered, or churlish, directly to them...it's circle the wagons time. I understand that, it is natural. It does not make it any more infuriating for a 'new' member here though.

A bit more on topic though, I did read the article Callipygous referred to....after a once through, it seems to be true, in the ideal, but reality I suspect is far messier than what I took his message as: "America decided a black man was needed at this time to show the world how far we have come"I could be completely wrong about what he intended. I know this is an historic election, the first of anything like this is, but isn't it some measure of how far we haven't come that he will be still known as the first 'black' president? It is easy to classify him thus, but if we were as evolved as we wish, would it be right?That is probably too much to ask, especially before his first day in office. I can only hope he is remembered as president for something other than being first, or being black.
Posts: 70 | From: Never you mind | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged